Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Juvenile Services Funding topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Marion County approves nearly $2 million from Oregon Youth Authority and $477,277 from ODE to support juvenile prevention and family support programs

Marion County Board of Commissioners · October 30, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Marion County commissioners approved OYA funding of up to $1,994,551 and an ODE amendment adding $477,277 on Oct. 29 to support juvenile crime‑prevention, guaranteed attendance and family‑support services.

Marion County commissioners on Oct. 29 approved incoming funds totaling nearly $2 million from the Oregon Youth Authority (OYA) and an additional $477,277 through an amendment to an Oregon Department of Education (ODE) intergovernmental agreement to support juvenile crime‑prevention, diversion and family‑support services.

Troy Gregg, director of Marion County Juvenile Department, told the board the OYA funds — not to exceed $1,994,551 and retroactive to July 1, 2025 — will support juvenile crime‑prevention base and diversion services, including the county’s guaranteed attendance program (GAP) and the shelter program. Gregg said those dollars cover roughly one third of GAP’s cost; the remainder comes from the county’s general fund and program reimbursements.

Separately, the board approved an exemption and reinstatement of an expired intergovernmental agreement with ODE and then approved amendment No. 4 to incoming funds under that agreement, which adds $477,277 for family‑support positions and program operations. Gregg said the family‑support program funds 1.5 positions and that staff plans a future work session to present program data.

Both actions were approved by voice vote. Several commissioners emphasized the programs’ role in diverting young people from deeper involvement with the state juvenile system and requested follow‑up briefings on program effectiveness.